Full Earth view from ISS Cupola Impossible 100 percent Fake

Simple question, if it's a camera lens, why is the cockpit not more prevelant, if it's fish eyed Windows, why are they all showing the same image, not
multiple fish eyed images for each individual fish eyed window

It's a wide angle lens (fish eye) fairly close to the windows (which are not fish eyed, but may be shaped to bend light none the less). It's
not 2 meters back like WaxingGibbons says. THIS is 2 meters back:

I really don't see why people are arguing about this. The earth as viewed in the cupola is framed by space, not cupola frame as you can see external
equipment overlaying space and the composite image of earth. In addition, a fish-eye lens, like a 17mm could only see as far as the horizon. In order
to even stand a chance of getting an optically distorted ball, the camera lens would have to be placed against the surface of the cupola glass and
this is obviously not the case. BTW, the type of camera doesn't matter, this about distance from planet and distance from cupola. I fully believe this
image is a composite, with the cupola window overplayed on top. So not necessarily fake as the images required to construct the composite were
probably real, but the perspective and representation is fake.

Max obfuscation. NASA is liars because they said it was impossible to photograph the whole Earth[allegedly]. Even though these types of composites
aren't even the whole Earth anyway. Nor did NASA claim they are, within reasonable explination. He also probably thinks the Earth is flat.

NASA doesn't even claim to not composite images from the Capula

"To achieve the longer exposures I do what many amateur astronomers do. I take multiple 30-second exposures, then ‘stack’ them using imaging
software, thus producing the longer exposure.” A total of 46 images photographed by the astronaut-monitored stationary camera in the Cupola were
combined to create this composite."

His point isn't merely this image is a composite, his claim is NASA ????? counterclaims the idea it's a composite, and they are liars, because they
one time were quoted, something he basically misinterpreted as a universal law of physics. Low Earth Orbit= Impossible to photograph full earth, no
exceptions.

Ummm...actually...if you take into account the angle of the windows surrounding the center window...take photo's from each of those windows facing
squarely out each one...and...the square to the center window photo...then combine them into a composite image...you will get the effect that is
presented in these photo's... I agree with your assessment...these are composite photographs...that show a portion of the earth with space around the
whole circumference with sections of a Russian supply ship...other exterior equipment...and sections of solar paneling...within the context of the
space that's visible around the circumference... Therefore these are composite false images... Thank you for bringing this enigma to the board...I
think I solved the puzzle...but I've been wrong before...once... (shouldn't that be spelled wunce...?)

Omg really, I am saying that if you are 10 cm away from them you won't be able to get their whole body in the shot. You saw the drawing, you read my
explanation, you read NASA's explanation, and still you don't get it?

a reply to: WaxingGibbons
From 300 miles up, you are seeing all you can see of earth, which isnt much...because the diameter of earth is about 8000 miles. Take a look at the
ISS photo of Lake Malawi. from 300 miles, its about the right size. Google earth shows its length to be about 400 miles... why just right for that
ISS photo.
Conclusion: the ISS photos are real, and show the Whole Earth from an eye height of 400 miles...and you sir claim that NASA says these photos are of
the whole earth...with a diameter of 8000 miles.
FALSE.

Does you pic show a full sphere with space around it? No it doesn't, so again, you are irrelevant, posting stuff that doesn't even apply. Is it hard
to grasp? It must be for you......

I love how you fully fail to grasp what is said every time because of your own personal irrelevant details.

It's not relevant that NASA claims to take composites from the Capula, while you say they're liars for using Composites? Because it's not a full-earth
photo? Oh. Okay. Jesus.

Are you an idiot? You can't even officially source this image with anything, nor can you quote this thing you claim NASA to have said 50 times that
you massively generalize to your liking. The one attempt you made what pathetically dismal at proving any of the points you are making. God...I hope
that wasn't 'it'.

Simple question, if it's a camera lens, why is the cockpit not more prevelant, if it's fish eyed Windows, why are they all showing the same image, not
multiple fish eyed images for each individual fish eyed window

It's a wide angle lens (fish eye) fairly close to the windows (which are not fish eyed, but may be shaped to bend light none the less). It's
not 2 meters back like WaxingGibbons says. THIS is 2 meters back:

It's play on words at the end. 9x 3 does equal 27, but this is already accounting for the 2 the clerk kept and the 3 returned. Had the clerk not kept
2, it would be 25, so 27+2 makes you assume you're trying to get to 30. Figuring out the $30 is easy. They each have 1$, the Clerk has $2, and there
is $25 in the drawer.

Great, thanks, I'm just gonna take a dollar from my pocket and throw it on the table and get outta here......problem solved in my mind

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.